reflection wrote:Haha, that's the limitations of internet communication right there.

Too true.

"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

BuddhaSoup wrote:It's interesting to me, being a member on both Dhamma Wheel and Dharma Wheel the difference in tone at times, between the two. I enjoy and respect both tremendously. I have my own thoughts as to why there may be differences in tone, having studied/practiced in both Dhamma and Dharma. I still come back to the idea of trying to maintain Metta (goodwill) and an effort at right speech, with others. I'm guilty of being snarky at times, and for that I'm not always pleased with my performance. It's always my hope that new folks come to these forums and find a welcoming environment, just as out Hindu friend arrived today seeking input. I'd hate to think that someone new came to DW seeking advice, counsel or a kalyana mitta and met a nasty exchange over anatta.

I don't use Dharmawheel. Is it a friendlier place, overall?

If it is, that's interesting. Is the tone affected by the wider net that is cast, which includes many Buddhist schools/branches?

As to new members being hammered on 'anatta': I've seen that happen. (and think I might even be guilty of doing that myself )

While reflecting on the subject, I started to think about when/how a post gets not-nice.- the poster intentionally want to write a rude/not-nice post- the poster is unaware that his/her writing comes out rude/not-nice- the reader misread the posting, and reads it as rude/not-nice

I almost never see examples ( that could be one of my delusion ;) ) on the first. I think one of the other options is most likely; try to confront the writer, that one think is not-nice, and you would most likely get a apologetic reply, stating that that was not the intention.

If one builds a delusion, that a topic is rude, hence the poster is rude, one has planted a seed for own dukkha. Off course there is a (small) chance that the writer wants to be rude, and hurt others; those writings/people I would silently ignore, and include them in my metta, as they have to live with the bad khamma they build for them self.

Just some thoughts from my contemplations, I will continue to "measure" the topic in regards to hate/greed/delusion and their sources...

alan... wrote:... i've also seen a lot of people join who seem to get ripped up by old heads when they have a differing opinion or are simply incorrect on a topic or statement, then they seem to disappear shortly thereafter.

Yes, I see this happen from time to time on Buddhist forums, and it's a shame that newbies are sometimes put off. On the plus side there are a number of different Buddhist forums and I think most people find one where they feel at home.

Reductor wrote:For many Theravadins, anatta is the teaching that sets this school apart from all the rest, so of course those that fail to respect it will be ridden hard.

That could be a reason.

But my thinking goes more along the lines of understanding the practical implications of one's stance on anatta, esp. if this understanding is that anatta means that there is no self, ultimately.It can get really bizarre when someone argues that there is no self, but then gets really personally upset over people who question the idea that there is no self, and then personally criticizes those people (along with calling them names) ...

Then the Blessed One, picking up a tiny bit of dust with the tip of his fingernail, said to the monk, "There isn't even this much form...feeling...perception...fabrications...consciousness that is constant, lasting, eternal, not subject to change, that will stay just as it is as long as eternity." (SN 22.97)

There's also the fact that some people are simply deeply attached to their particular didactic model.For example, some people believe that the only way to instruct others is by speaking harshly to them, or by yelling at them, or by even beating them. They either cannot imagine another way of instructing others, or they believe that no other way can be effective; or they just get a boost out of treating others harshly.

Well, "thin skin" and "hurt feelings" are sometimes just manifestations of pride, and lack of faith.I think that people who are really interested will stick around, even if this means enduring some harsh treatment.And as for those who aren't really interested - perhaps it's better that they go away.

binocular wrote:Well, "thin skin" and "hurt feelings" are sometimes just manifestations of pride, and lack of faith.I think that people who are really interested will stick around, even if this means enduring some harsh treatment.And as for those who aren't really interested - perhaps it's better that they go away.

I think too many people think they want to know something about Buddhism, or about Theravada, and so seek out a forum first when really they should check out a book from the library, or read some articles. Then they could ask better informed and more relevant questions when they do come here, and avoid a smack down by those of us lacking the delicate touch.

That is, they should have enough interest to make a start on their own. I doubt then that they'd be so easily turned away from Theravada by a bunch of strangers on Dhammawheel, although they might go somewhere else that suits them better.

Being nicer is good; setting an example is good though it may not always be easy (especially online). These days people search online before getting any book. It's better that whoever comes here to DhammaWheel see people talking nicely -- not to show that we Buddhists are so nice, but simply not to scare them off -- so that they may try to learn deep deep teachings of the Buddha for their own good. I agree with you alan..., and your post is definitely not stupid but very relevant. The Buddha's great teachings are astoundingly accurate, and we do not need to sound rude to tell that to someone else.

Last edited by manas on Wed Apr 17, 2013 9:14 am, edited 1 time in total.

Then the Blessed One, picking up a tiny bit of dust with the tip of his fingernail, said to the monk, "There isn't even this much form...feeling...perception...fabrications...consciousness that is constant, lasting, eternal, not subject to change, that will stay just as it is as long as eternity." (SN 22.97)

If you have a complaint about how some one is being treated here, use the "report" function and/or leave a PM with a mod or admin. Both these actions get quick and appropriate responses. Your characterization here of this forum is not quite accurate, but simply become the change you want to see, which could start in this very thread.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<<-- Proverbs 26:12